ArticleHeart and vessels2022
Comparing pharmacotherapy in MINOCA versus medically managed obstructive acute coronary syndrome.
Article in Heart and vessels, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Molecular mechanisms of coronary microembolization-induced MINOCA.Basic research in cardiology · 2026Review
- Molecular screening in a translational large animal trial identifies a differential inflammatory response for MINOCA.Basic research in cardiology · 2025Article
- Impact of sex on the outcome of troponin-positive patients with non-obstructive coronary arteries.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Myocardial Infarction with Obstructive, Non-Obstructive, and Mimicking Conditions: Clinical Phenotypes, Diagnostic Imaging, Management, and Prognosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Prognostic factors of MINOCA and their possible mechanisms.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Review
- Sex differences in treatment and outcomes amongst myocardial infarction patients presenting with and without obstructive coronary arteries: a prospective multicentre study.European heart journal open · 2023Article
- MINOCA: One Size Fits All? Probably Not-A Review of Etiology, Investigation, and Treatment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most prior studies have compared myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA), to obstructive acute coronary syndrome (ACS) often requiring revascularisation. However, these were subject to treatment bias given the significant differences in management. This study uniquely compares the management and outcomes of MINOCA patients with a medically managed obstructive ACS (M-ACS) population. We retrospectively analysed registry data for consecutive patients admitted to the Gold Coast University Hospital with ACS requiring coronary angiography and identified patients with MINOCA and M-ACS. Baseline characteristics, pharmacological therapy and in-hospital outcomes were compared. In hospital outcomes were composite NACE, heart failure, stroke and major bleeding. Multivariate regression analysis was also performed to identify independent predictors of MINOCA. Multivariate regression analysis was also performed to identify independent predictors of MINOCA. We identified 139 patients with MINOCA and 142 patients with medically managed obstructive ACS (M-ACS). Multivariate regression analysis also identified female sex and cancer as independent predictors of MINOCA with odds ratios of 5.57 and 3.01, respectively. MINOCA patients were significantly less likely to receive cardioprotective medications at admission and discharge, specifically aspirin, beta-blockers, ACE-I and statins, compared to those with M-ACS. While mortality was higher among M-ACS patients (0.0% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.03), no significant differences were noted for composite NACE, heart failure, stroke and major bleeding. MINOCA patients have similar outcomes to M-ACS. Despite this, we noted a discrepancy in the use of cardioprotective medications. We also identified female sex and cancer were independent predictors of MINOCA. This may represent a missed opportunity to prevent adverse events among patients with MINOCA. Large, randomised trials are required to provide more definitive evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.